FTC Accepts Revised Amazon Privacy Rules 55
adashtrash writes: "This article, from a Seattle area news source, reports that the Federal Trade Commission has ruled that Amazon did not deceive consumers with their revised privacy policy. This policy claimed Amazon's right to consider user information as a business asset, and removed users' 'opt-out' options. In fact, even those customers who previously had opted out of sharing personal information were now at risk of having that information shared out with Amazon partners or even sold at Amazon's discretion. Two privacy watchdog groups had protested to the FTC, prompting today's ruling."
Simple Choice (Score:2)
The ruling only seems to confirm the wisdom of my choice at the time Amazon's privacy policy was revised.
And that decision is this:
Previously, my wife and I probably bought about $500/year of merchandise from them, but not any more.While most consumers blithely choose to be oblivious of corporate intrusions into their privacy, my small decision is meant, however infinitesimally, to promote the respect of my privacy in businesses that want to collect my money.
Think Again... (Score:1)
Amazon has a huge database of customer information. They never forced you to give them your full address and phone number - if you didn't want to, you could walk your ass down to the local BookCity and buy whatever it was that you wanted. So you gave them that information of your own free will. Also bear in mind that address/mailing list sales is a hugely profitable business, especially selling to demgraphics/research firms, and even more so to those guys who conduct surveys online and ask "so, when's the last time you bought a book witten by a woman?" Not to mention spammers. Selling contacts is a profitable business, regardless of the morals of it. Realize also that Amazon ain't making any money. The market is down, the .com boom is over, and they don't have a hope, let alone a business plan. They need to generat cash, and to do so, they wanna sell some stuff that people gave them freely. Regardless of what they said when you gave it to them, you gave it to them of your own free will.
How about this? A man sits outside a bookshop, makes a not of all the books that people buy and takes a picture of who bought what. The then scours various archives to put names to those faces. He then uses a phone book to put addresses to those names to those faces to those books. They had the choice weather to bo on this list - they could have gone elsewhere. But he did the hard work (as Amazon did), and should be able to sell his work.
It all boils down to this: you freely gave Amazon your personal information. You had the total choice of weather to do so, and could have freely gone to a physical bookstore where they don't need to know where you live. You gave them the information, so you don't have the right to complain when they do what they want with it.
Have you ever been given a gift you didn't like (or need), and returned it to the store for somthign better or sold it to your friend? If so, then you're doing exactly what Amazon has done. Taken somthing that one person will give away for free, and sell it to somone else who will pay big money for it. If Amazon even has your data to sell, it's no one's fault but your own.
This isn't a troll or flambait, it's reality.
One-Click crap now this.. (Score:1)
Unequal Distribution (Score:1)
To achieve privacy... (Score:1)
- But you can stop signing up for "special offers".
- You can stop giving out your private e-mail address.
- You can stop using "free" services like hotmail.com.
- You can host your own e-mail servers and set them up to drop packets from untrusted sources.
- You can get internet access and e-mail accounts from Mom & Pop shops that you know and trust and aren't called AOL and haven't had a merger since their daughter got married.
- You can public key encrypt all of your e-mail communications.
- You can lobby for public terminals.
- You can call credit reporting agencies and have yourself removed from their lists while you still can (the number is 888-567-8688).
- When you buy a new house, car, whatever, make sure you read the contract and CROSS OUT the section that is there 75% of the time that allows the company to sell your personal information to marketers.
- You can complain to ISPs of companies that violate their privacy policies or whose policies do not provide the level of protection required by the ISP.
- You can take corporations to court.
The list goes on. When was the last time you wrote to your congressmen? Actually boycotted something? You can maintain privacy, but it takes effort. As your convenience of getting "out there" improves, so improves the ability of "them" to get your personal information and use it to their profit.If you want absolute privacy, you need to absolutely prevent any contact with the outside world. Or you can be careful and think about your behaviour and the precautions you've taken and maintain some sort of happy medium.
This is going to become harder and harder to attain while corporations become more and more powerful, so best you start now.
--brian
Explain to me... (Score:2)
--
the real scandal is.... (Score:1)
I emailed amazon.com asking to be permanently removed from their database. It took a while to find the correct e-mail address but I got a response in the end saying that my account had been cancelled.
one amazon.de/amazon.co.uk purchase later I was back in the amazon.com database. I even got the "welcome back here are you recommendation
Now I don't know what you think of that, but it's deffinately illegal (in the EU anyway) but I guess the felony was commited by amazon.comm (a US company) ooooOOOHHHH legal grey-zone....wOOhOO I think I'm going to try to cancel all my amazon accounts but it won't be easy.
Why can't the united states of america finally adopt sensible consumer rights laws.../me shakes head
We knew this. (Score:2)
Amazon filed frivolous patent lawsuits, and we said "they're scum", and everyone said "no, it's a purely defensive patent, that's why they need to take it to court to prevent people from doing something similar".
Amazon invented "purchase circles", and everyone defended them.
Have you guys gotten the clue yet? Spammers always lie. They always cheat. They always steal. They don't change their colors. In general, they don't reform. When you know that a company is willing to send mail to people who never asked for it, you know that, when times are tough, that company will sell your name, your credit card number, whatever they can *get*, to try to stay in business.
So how about, next time, when someone points out that a geek-darling company spams, bite back the instinctive response of "you can just opt out", and remember that *YOU*, the people who defended Amazon for so long, are the people who showed them that the geek community didn't really care about privacy, and today, no, you can't opt out.
We told you so.
Re:This is unbelievable (Score:2)
Regulatory Body: You got it.
Big Corporation: But...
Regulatory Body: You got it.
Big Corporation: Heh, we didn't even say what is it we want.
Regulatory Body: Whatever it is, you got it. We're here to please you. Do you want a blow job too?
Big Corporation: Hm, er... yes, that would be nice.
Regulatory Body: (cracking whip) Joe Consumer! Give Big Corporation a blow job. NOW, or I'll cut your ration again!
Joe Consumer: Arf! Arf!
Re:This is unbelievable (Score:1)
-
What you forget.. (Score:2)
If the people want to restrict what Amazon can do, doing it through government is an option.
Re:Another way of dealing with this problems (Score:1)
Re:Think Again... (Score:1)
Thus Amazon is illegal in the EU (Score:2)
EU privacy directives state that no data should be sent to sites which do not comply to the EU's privacy policies[1]. So Amazon is illegal to use for anybody in the EU.
[1]Such policies state basically that every entity which has a database of personal informations must allow the persons registered there to view, modify and delete any information stored in such databases. Furthermore, prior to inserting any personal data in any database, the person whose data are being inserted is to be notified of the fact, and any use of the data has to be authorized (most italian sites for instance have a double checkbox which has to be checked, one allowing use of the data for the transaction the data is being isnerted for, and another for "extra" uses such as SPAM^H^H^H^Htargeted email advertising, etc. ALL uses have to be notified.)
I hope this is only Amazon's US subsidiary... (Score:2)
... because, under European Union law at least, it's illegal to either:
or
If they're breaking these laws, they should beware. Some EU countries, unlike the US, seemingly, take the privacy of their citizens/subjects very seriously.
Mind you, having set up an account with amazon.com and finding that the information in my account is stored independently of that for amazon.co.uk (so I would have a blank account on amazon.com, were I to move stateside or want something delivered there or somesuch), I'm annoyed with them. Not to mention their 'patent' abuses...
Re:This is unbelievable (Score:1)
Re:good (Score:1)
So you see the flaw in your reasoning. Mindless consumer drones care too little about these things, so 'boycott' won't hurt them enough. Let them get away with it, and it becomes common practice. Once it's common practice, you start seeing nasty side-effects, like that everything you ever do or buy is known by marketers and other departments of megacorporations, and they abuse this information as they see fit. You work for Megacorporation A? And you go and buy (cheaper) alternative product that's manufactured by Megacorp B, even when there's the same thing available manufactured by Megacorp A? Next week your supervisor calls you and tells you that your pay has been lowered due to lack of your loyalty towards your workplace, as there is a company policy that employees should always favour company's own brands.
What a fun society that would be... :)
There are just far too many ways to abuse this kind of system, so it must not be allowed to happen in the first place - we are already quite far down this slipperly slope, and no regulation of what so ever is scary proposition.
Re:good (Score:1)
Yeah, let's all use our own, private definitions of words, until we're all convinced we are the only ones who are right, and everybody else is an idiot!
It's time /. gets a Semantics Nazi to assist the Grammar Nazi ...
You called for me, and I came...License your info! (Score:1)
Wish I'd thought of this earlier, but maybe folks will pick up on it...
Does anyone else see a similarity here? You want to give these companies access to your private information to do what they have to do, but you want to exercise some control over it. So you want to give something away and still keep it. Sound like something other people do to you all the time? Like, say, a software license? Why not do just that? License your private information to the companies, spelling out what they can or cannot do. Note in the "comments" field a lot of online stores have that you are giving them your private information under the terms of your license (provide URL) and that doing business with you (fulfilling the order) constitutes acceptance of the terms. If they have a problem, they can email you and talk it over.
Then, suddenly, they're not the only ones with a policy. And if they capriciously change theirs, that does not free them from the license they agreed to. It seems as good as any silly agreement they make you sign on to. Probably worth a try. Will they just refuse to fulfil the order? Maybe. It's something to try.
I'll try to remember this next time a similar story comes out, so I can post it when it's more likely to be read. Meanwhile, if you think this is a good idea, send me some mail and maybe we can make a standard license for people to use. This might be interesting.
Re:This guy's a Troll (Score:2)
Because some people might decide that their privacy is less valuable than what someone offers them for their information? Just because you (and I, in most cases) don't agree with that decision doesn't mean it's not theirs to make.
Accepting this argument would logically lead to arguming for the imagined right of people to sell themselves into slavery.
Most of us regularly sacrifice some of our freedom in exchange for money; it's called "work".
His argument is still invalid, because Amazon changing their policy retroactively is a blatant breach of contract. But what this shows is that the FTC can't be counted on to protect consumers, because surprisingly government organizations do not always act in the best interests of the public. This should make people stop and think before proposing government intervention as the solution to every problem.
My message to Amazon (Score:3)
I am disturbed by your new privacy policy with its provision to transfer customer information:
"In such transactions, customer information generally is one of the transferred business assets. Also, in the unlikely event that Amazon.com, Inc., or substantially all of its assets are acquired, customer information will of course be one of the transferred assets."
You will see from my account history that I have made many Amazon.com purchases in the past. I can't believe you want to lose me and other customers like me. But because of this provision, I am considering removing my customer information from your database, and stopping doing business with you. I have not yet made up my mind.
Please reconsider this policy, or consider adding a commitment that any transfer of my customer information to a third party will place the acquiring party under the same opt-out restrictions under which I provided that information to you. This does not seem an unreasonable restriction, and in fact might be seen as increasing the value of your assets, since it would ensure a happier customer base.
Thank you.
Same old story (Score:2)
I don't buy from them anyway because they are the poster child for patent abuse. And now this. How many reasons do you need to boycott Amazon?
-----------------------
This is unbelievable (Score:5)
For example, credit card companies always reserve the right to change their policies at any time, with wtitten notice, however in the policy change notice, there is a required statement to the effect that "Customers who choose not to accept the updated policies, may cancel their service within 30 days, provided written notice, durring which time the policy will not take effect for them". Amazon has gotten around that entirely. There appears to be no way to compel Amazon to remove your customer data from their database even if you disagree with their policies to the point that you hoose to no longer do business with them. Amazon has one thing working in their favor (and I'm not certain about the details of this, but...) unlike in a court of law, the policy ruling of the FTC can not be appealed in the legal sense. There are appeal procedured but they are all internal to the FTC and as far as I can tell, rather stilted in favor of the corporate entity who's policy was under review.
All the attention that has been givel privacy policies of late, has had the profoundly negitive impact of prompting corporate lawyers to see what they can actually get away with without being smacked by the FTC. There are now companies who have chosen to initiate sales (to previous or existing customers) wherre those customers must take positive action to prevent the transaction, unlike treditional sales malings where an offer is made and the customer must act in order to initiate the transaction. This too was deemed legal, so long as the practive was outlined in that company's privacy policy / terms of service. This stuff is really getting way out of hand, but nothing will be done to correct it until a high profile case is found, that can serve as a PR statement for privacy and fair business practices advocates.
--CTH
--
My info is Amazon's business asset? (Score:5)
So does this mean that since I am the owner of the information and Amazon is simply borrowing/renting/licensing/stealing it from me, I have the right to charge Amazon for selling my information? If it is a business asset to them, it is also certainly a business asset to me and they are a customer to that.
I believe it's time we all sent them a bill and a AUP for renting our information.
Re:My message to Amazon (Score:1)
Guess what, Save for one of those automatic "we value your input very much" garbage-auto-replies nobody ever bothered to actually respond.
A month later that forced me to send snail-mail, certified. Needless to say that I never received a reply either. On a sidenote: My communication was never offensive or hostile.
Their customer treatment reminds me of the lame old joke: How do you know if an Amazon representative lies ? Well, when he opens his mouth, of course...
Re:Don't like it? Just try to complain... (Score:1)
To help us make e-mails more useful and interesting, we often receive a confirmation when you open e-mail from Amazon.com if your computer supports such capabilities.
In other words, "we use web bugs [privacyfoundation.org]".
I want my cut (Score:1)
After all, they're making money off of my personal information, regardless of whether I want them to sell it or not...
Re:good (Score:1)
It's time
Maybe it's just me... (Score:2)
Guess that only counts if you're a small business or a 'criminal'.
Off to send my "you won't get another dime out of me, you bastards" mail...
Re:My message to Amazon (Score:1)
Amazon Merger! (Score:5)
Microsoft, Amazon, AOL, and the U.S. Defense Department will merge to form a new company: MAAD.
The new company will be the most abusive company in the history of the world. It will sell deliberately defective products so you will need to upgrade, show no respect for your privacy, spam you with porno invitations, and, if you complain, bomb your country.
Re:good (Score:2)
Maybe we should all just patent our info. (Score:1)
Re:what's so wrong about this? (Score:1)
`Such personal information includes names, shipping and billing addresses, credit card numbers and e-mail addresses. It can also include employers, gift wish lists, Social Security numbers and photographs for customers who taken advantage of special personalization features'.
This is about as private as it could get. The fact that there is no longer an option to opt out adds salt to the wound; the fact that anyone who's *ever* given their information to Amazon adds caustic soda.
Also, as an aside and with regards to advertising funded television, I live in England and there is of course the BBC. This is paid for by the television licence, and is severel orders of magnitude better than the ad funded channels. Coincidence? Nah..
Molf
According to the article... (Score:2)
That just makes it more confusing, doesn't it...
Capitalism == Communism (Score:1)
God, I really wish this particular AC either paid any attention to politics, or perhaps less of a request, graduated from High School. Capitalism and Communism are not the only systems that exist. In fact, Capitalism and Communism share one central thing: their distain for government. Capitalits say that government should keep their hands out of business as regulation is simply opression of the working class, and die-hard Communists say that there should be no government, as it's simply a way of opression of the workers. Communism is actually Marxism, with some extrimism thrown in by Stalin.
I'm also wondering if this guy has heard of words like "anarchism," "utilitarianism," and "mercantilism." They're all perfectly valid schools of economic thought. In fact, the world ran for quite a while on mercantilist principles. Granted, we soon thereafter decided they were wrong, but they're still valid.
Get a grip; read a social studies textbook. And realize that the world is NOT The American Way vs. The Communist Menace.
And I'm not even getting into why Communism (properly executed) isn't a bad thing.
Re:Simple Choice (Score:1)
So I told AT&T that they were just going to have to keep sending my bill in the mail every month. More important, I told them WHY.
--
This guy's a Troll (Score:2)
> Let Amazon have any privacy rule they want. Let them sell
> their information to every advertiser in the world. But let the consumer choose if he wants to buy Amazon products and give
> his information to Amazon. If he doesn't like the idea of advertisers calling him up then he's free to shop at bn.com. It's
> called capitalism, gentlemen.
Notice how shallow is reasoning actually is: as a for instance, he ducks the question why is it a good thing to trade privacy for convenience? Accepting this argument would logically lead to arguming for the imagined right of people to sell themselves into slavery. Which -- last I heard -- everyone here on
Let's not feed this troll. Move along -- there's nothing to see.
Geoff
amazon vs. BandN (Score:1)
Another way of dealing with this problems (Score:1)
IANAL, but in France this wouldn't happen : there is a independant agency whose job is to rule all computer-based people databases. All databases of this kind must get approved by this agency (the CNIL), and must comply to the laws about it, such as if you want to, you can ALWAYS opt out.
This works also for governments databases BTW. On the other hand this might be a bit too intrusive, since it makes it harder to make databases about people. Yet I personnally prefer this to the american free-for-all : imagine the guy who owns Amazon and other big companies, say AOL too, gets elected president (something equivalent has recently happened in Italy), and turns out to be some kind of extremist, who will be happy to condamn people based on their opinions or anything like that. I wouldn't want to be in his files...
Re:My info is Amazon's business asset? (Score:2)
just a thought
And people wonder whey.. (Score:2)
Re:My message to Amazon (Score:1)
Honestly (Score:2)
--
What's the point? (Score:2)
What the fuck is the point of a privacy policy?
A privacy policy is an agreement between the company and the customer about the usage of personal, sensitive information. If I don't like the terms, then I don't use their site. Simple as that. But now, the increasingly worthless FTC has decided that I'm SOL if I provide my information with the understanding that I may opt-out at a later date, but my opt-out right is later revoked. So I ask again -
What the fuck is the point of privacy policy?
Now, all a privacy policy means is that I'm trusting a corporation not to fuck me later. Some companies are better bets than others. However, in this goddamn golden age of corporate mergers and buyouts, I have no guarantee my data won't be whored out once a trustworthy company is acquired by another with less scruples.
So I say, "Thank you FTC", for sending the message, loud and clear, that if I choose to use the Internet for e-Commerce I have ABSOLUTELY NO RIGHT to define the usage of my own information.
-------
Re:This is unbelievable (Score:2)
Is it possible to file a class action suit on behalf of customers for the "opt out" changes? Would the FTC ruling sink the case, or would it still be possible?
Perhaps some enterprising lawyer could make a bundle and force Amazon to do the right thing at the same time.
time to start (Score:2)
Once your in your stuck too. (Score:2)
Re:good (Score:1)
i'm sorry, no.
-------
Amazon.com inspires a new Net Business Model! (Score:1)
re: ye olde bait and switch... (Score:1)
Unions (Score:1)
Re:good (Score:2)
You see in a pure capitalist society you will have a hand full of people become extremely rich and everyone else will be extremely poor. Only through socialist policies can the government protect the everyone else through things like minimum wage, safety regulations, health standards, and all the other things that protect the workers and consumers. If it weren't for the government protecting your rights from large corporations we would all be living in bunkhouses of large factories in a form of pseudo-slavery.
I'm not saying that the government completely protect our right, they do things that put the corporations before us too. But there are things in place that are meant to protect us, and there are currently acts in congress that target personal privacy specifically so that companies like Amazon can't distribute your information on a whim and give you no choice in the matter.
Don't like it? Just try to complain... (Score:1)
But we can trust them, can't we? After all, they told the FTC that they would never transfer customer information for people who don't want them to do that. It means nothing that their privacy policy says "customer information will of course be one of the transferred assets".
Another part of their "privacy" policy that I really liked was this paragraph, after scrolling down about 100 lines:
With Your Consent: Other than as set out above, you will receive notice when information about you might go to third parties, and you will have an opportunity to choose not to share the information.
I guess they really do have my best interests in mind, at least after the first 100 lines of exceptions.
There's no reason to put up with this kind of BS. Just buy your books somewhere else.
Great (Score:1)
Unfortunately they - and all Amazon ventures and subsidiaries - lost my business for the rest of my life.
That is because they turned out to be a bunch of lying, corporate greed freaks, that's why